2023

2021

  • Zumbo, B. D. (2021). A Novel Multimethod Approach to Investigate Whether Tests Delivered at a Test Centre are Concordant with those Delivered Remotely Online: An Investigation of the Concordance of the CAEL [monograph]. Vancouver, BC: Paragon Testing Enterprises/UBC Paragon Research Initiative, University of British Columbia.

2020

  • Lin, Y. & Chen, M. Y., (2020). Understanding writing quality change: A longitudinal study of repeaters of a high-stakes standardized English proficiency test. Language Testing. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220925448

2019

  • Li, Z., & Chen, M. Y. (2019). Application of ANCOVA and MANCOVA in language assessment research. In V. Aryadoust & M. Raquel (Eds.), Quantitative data analysis for language assessment Volume I fundamental techniques. New York: Routledge.
  • Payant, C., McDonogh, K., Uludag, P., & Lindberg, R. (2019) Predicting integrated writing task performance: Source comprehension, prewriting planning, and individual differences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.06.001

2018

  • Gadermann, M. A., Chen, M. Y., Emerson, D. S., & Zumbo, B. D. (2018). Examining validity evidence of self-report measures using differential item functioning: An illustration of three methods. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 14(4), 165–176. doi: 10.1027/1614-2241/a000156
  • Plough, I. C, Banerjee, J., & Iwashita, N. (Eds.). (2018). Special Issue on Interactional Competence. Language Testing, 35(3).

2017

  • Chen, M. Y., & Zumbo, B. D. (2017). Ecological framework of item responding as validity evidence: An application of multilevel DIF modeling using PISA Data. In B. D. Zumbo & A. M. Hubley (Eds.), Understanding and Investigating Response Processes in Validation Research (pp. 53–68). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56129-5_4
  • Li, Z., Banerjee, J., & Zumbo, B. D. (2017). Response time data as validation evidence: Has it lived up to its promise, and if not, what would it take to do so. In B. D. Zumbo & A. M. Hubley (Eds.), Understanding and Investigating Response Processes in Validation Research (pp. 159–177). Springer International Publishing. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56129-5_9
  • Li, Z., Dursun, A., & Hegelheimer, V. (2017). Technology and L2 writing. In C. A. Chapelle & S. Sauro (Eds.), The Handbook of Technology in Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 77–92). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Li, Z., Feng, H.-H., & Saricaoglu, A. (2017). The short-term and long-term effects of AWE feedback on ESL students’ development of grammatical accuracy. CALICO Journal, 34(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.26382
  • Li, Z. & Volkov, A. (2017). “To Whom It May Concern”: A Study on the Use of Lexical Bundles in Email Writing Tasks in an English Proficiency Test. TESL Canada Journal, 34(3), 54-75. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v34i3.1273
  • Wu, A. D., Chen, M. Y., & Stone, J. E. (2017). Investigating how test-takers change their strategies to handle difficulty in taking a reading comprehension test: Implications for score validation. International Journal of Testing, Advanced online publication. http://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2017.1396464
  • Zhou, Z., & Li, Z. (2017). Exploring the relationship between fluency measures and speaking performance of prospective international teaching assistants. In M. O’Brien & J. Levis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference (pp. 176–185). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.

2016

  • Appel, R., & Wood, D. (2016). Recurrent word combinations in EAP test-taker writing: Differences between high- and low-proficiency levels. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(1), 55–71. http://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2015.1126718
  • Banerjee, J. & Papageorgiou, S. (2016). What’s in a topic? Exploring the interaction between test-taker age and item content in high-stakes testing. The International Journal of Listening, 30(1-2), 8 – 24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2015.1056876
  • Banerjee, J., & Tsagari, D. (Eds.) (2016). Contemporary Second Language Assessment. London: Continuum.
  • Douglas, S. (2016). The relationship between lexical frequency profiling measures and rater judgements of spoken and written general English language proficiency on the CELPIP-General Test. TESL Canada Journal, 32, 43–64. http://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v32i0.1217
  • Fox, J., von Randow, J., & Volkov, A. (2016). Identifying students at-risk through post-entry diagnostic assessment: An Australasian approach takes root in a Canadian university. In V. Arayadoust & J. Fox (Eds.), Trends in Language Assessment Research and Practice: The View from the Middle East and the Pacific Rim (pp. 266–285). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Hegelheimer, V., Dursun, A., & Li, Z. (2016). Automated writing evaluation in language teaching: Theory, development, and application. CALICO Journal, 33(1), i–v.
  • Stone, J., & Zumbo, B. D. (2016). Validity as a pragmatist project: A global concern with local application. In V. Aryadoust & J. Fox (Eds.), Trends in Language Assessment Research and Practice: The View from the Middle East and the Pacific Rim (pp. 555–573). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, UK.
  • Tsagari, D., & Banerjee, J. (Eds.) (2016). Handbook of Second Language Assessment. Boston/Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Verhelst, N., Banerjee, J. & McLain, P. (2016). Fairness and bias in language testing. In J. Banerjee & D. Tsagari (Eds.), Contemporary Second Language Assessment (pp. 243 – 260). London: Continuum.
  • Wu, A. D., & Stone, J. E. (2016). Validation through understanding test-taking strategies: An illustration with the CELPIP-General reading pilot test using structural equation modeling. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 34(3), 362–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282915608575
  • Wu, A. D., Stone, J. E., & Liu, Y. (2016). Developing a validity argument through abductive reasoning with an empirical demonstration of the latent class analysis. International Journal of Testing, 16(1), 54–70. http://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2015.1057826

2015

2014

  • Cheng, L., Klinger, D., Fox, J., Doe, C., Jin, Y., & Wu, J. (2014). Motivation and test anxiety in test performance across three testing contexts: The CAEL, CET, and GEPT. TESOL Quarterly, 48, 300–330. doi:10.1002/tesq.105
  • Fox, J. & Fraser, W. (2014). Setting university language proficiency entry requirements on the Pearson Test of English Academic (PTE ACADEMIC) in relation to performance categories on the Canadian Academic English Language (CAEL) Assessment. Research Note

2013

  • Banerjee, J., Chen, N. N., & Dobson, B. (2013). Special needs test forms: levelling the playing field for test takers with disabilities. In D. Tsagari & G. Spanoudis (Eds.), Assessing L2 Students with Learning and Other Disabilities (pp. 253-279). Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

2011

  •  Doe, C., & Fox, J. (2011). Exploring the testing process: Three test takers’ observed and reported strategy use over time and testing contexts. The Canadian Modern Language Review / La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 67(1), 29–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.67.1.029
  • Fox, J., & Hartwick, P. (2011). Taking a diagnostic turn: Reinventing the portfolio in EAP classrooms. In D. Tsagari & Csepes (Eds.), Classroom-based language assessment (pp. 47–62). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

2010

  • Artemeva, N., & Fox, J. (2010). Awareness versus production: Probing students’ antecedent genre knowledge. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 24(4), 476–515. http://doi.org/10.1177/1050651910371302

2009

  • Fox, J. (2009). Moderating top-down policy impact and supporting EAP curricular renewal: Exploring the potential of diagnostic assessment. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(1), 26–42. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.12.004

2008

  • Fox, J. & Fraser, W. (2008). Comparative analysis Qatar Nursing Applicant Test Scores: CAEL Assessment and University of Calgary Admission Test. College of the North Atlantic – Qatar.
  • Fox, J. D. (2009). Moderating top-down policy impact and supporting EAP curricular renewal: Exploring the potential of diagnostic assessment. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(1), 26–42. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.12.004
  • Fox, J. D. (2005). Rethinking second language admission requirements: Problems with language-residency criteria and the need for language assessment and support. Language Assessment Quarterly, 2(2), 85–115. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0202_1

2007

  •  Banerjee, J., Franceschina, F. & Smith, A. M. (2007). Documenting features of written language production typical at different IELTS band score levels. In S. Walsh (Ed.), IELTS Research Report Volume 7 (pp. 241 – 309). Canberra: British Council and IDP: IELTS Australia.
  • Fraser, W., & Fox, J. (2007). Working for bi-directional washback: Tapping the potential of learner perception and classroom practice to improve test quality. In H. McGarrell (Ed.), Teacher Research Series, Vol. 3, Language Teacher Research in the Americas (pp. 69–82). Washington, D.C.: TESOL Publications.

2006

  •  Banerjee, J & Wall, D. (2006). Assessing performances on pre-sessional courses: developing a final assessment procedure. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), 50 – 69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.11.003

2004

2003

  •  Fox, J. (2003). From products to process: An ecological approach to bias detection. International Journal of Testing, 3(1), 21–47.

2002

  • Fraser, W. (2002). The role of reflection in the Canadian Academic English Language (CAEL) Assessment. CAEL Assessment Testing Office. Carleton University. Research Note 

2001

  • Berman, R., & Cheng, L. (2001). English academic language skills: Perceived difficulties by undergraduate and graduate students, and their academic achievement. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1–2), 25–40.
  • Fox, J. (2001). The role of reflection in the Canadian Academic English Language (CAEL) Assessment. CAEL Assessment Testing Office, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.

1999

  • Jennings, M., Fox, J., Graves, B., & Shohamy, E. (1999). The test-takers’ choice: An investigation of the effect of topic on language-test performance. Language Testing, 16(4), 426–456. http://doi.org/10.1177/026553229901600402

1995

  •  Fox, J., Pychyl, T. A., & Zumbo, B. D. (1995). An Investigation of Background Knowledge in the Assessment of Language Proficiency. In A. Huta, V. Kohonen, L. Kurki-Suonio, & S. Luoma (Eds.), Current Developments and Alternatives in Language Assessment (pp. 367–383). Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä and University of Tampere.

1993

  •  Fox, J., Zumbo, B. D., & Pychyl. (1993). Psychometric properties of the CAEL Assessment II: An examination of the dependability/reliability of placement decisions. Carleton Papers in Applied Language Studies, X, 13–26.
  • Fox, J., Zumbo, B. D., & Pychyl, T. A. (1993). Psychometric properties of the CAEL assessment I: An examination of the dependability/reliability of placement decisions. Carleton Papers in Applied Language Studies, X, 1-12.

1991

  • Fox, J., & Soucy, A. (1991). Collaborative assessment of writing. National Testing Network on Writing, 4, 10–11.

 

 

When I took CELPIP, I found it was like speaking English in real life. You speak every day with your boss and with your friends, and the CELPIP Test represents those every-day, real-life language situations.
- Rafaela B., CELPIP Test Taker
I had taken other English language proficiency before, and CELPIP was more relatable to me. All of the questions were situations I was familiar with from daily life, and were like conversations I had experienced personally.
- Chrisna D., CELPIP Test Taker